/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/08/13/#ubuntu-release.txt

=== a16g_ is now known as ypwong
=== forestpiskie is now known as Guest28422
=== Guest28422 is now known as forestpiskie
sil2100infinity: hi!10:07
sil2100infinity: for raring, someone proposed a fix as an SRU (LP: #1204664) which basically disables a default key combination - this key combination seemingly works only once, all subsequent other keycombination-presses of this shortcut fail - I guess it's a bit wrong for an SRU, right?10:10
ubot2`Launchpad bug 1204664 in compiz (Ubuntu Raring) "control+super+d works just the first time running Ubuntu Unity." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/120466410:10
=== mdeslaur_ is now known as mdeslaur
tseliotstgraber, slangasek: I've found and fixed an issue in fglrx-experimental-13. I'm about to upload a new revision for the same SRU. The diff is minimal12:49
tseliotstgraber, slangasek: ok, uploaded and here's the diff http://paste.ubuntu.com/5981051/12:55
rtgcjwatson, infinity: the autopackage test failure for linux 3.11.0-2.5 appears to be bogus (closeall.op: No space left on device). Can I get it promoted ?15:15
infinitysil2100: How is that inappropriate for an SRU?16:48
sil2100infinity: as it's modifying default behavior, disabling a keyboard shortcut that was in during the release16:51
infinitysil2100: One that doesn't work? :P16:51
sil2100infinity: even thought it wasn't really working... ;p16:51
infinitysil2100: Though I think I misunderstood initially.  Why not just fix the bug instead of disabling it?16:51
sil2100infinity: someone said it was working when you used it for the first time!16:51
infinitysil2100: It seems to work for me in saucy, so clearly, there's a fix for unity7 to make it work...16:52
sil2100infinity: yeah, I had a discussion with upstream after asking you the question, and I think we somehow resolved it, since there is a way of fixing it somehow from what I know16:52
sil2100infinity: and they'll be backporting the fix to raring16:52
infinitysil2100: Excellent, then I'll pretend this conversation never happened.16:52
sil2100infinity: thanks ;)16:52
sil2100hehe16:52
tseliotinfinity: can you approve the new revision of fglrx-experimental-13 in precise-proposed please? diff: http://paste.ubuntu.com/5981051/16:54
mdeslaurso...can someone explain why squid3 has not migrated from -proposed if the excuses page says "Valid Candidate"?18:44
rbasakmdeslaur: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_output.txt is saying migrating squid3 would make sqcwa and squid-prefetch uninstallable.18:58
rbasak(AFAICT)18:59
mdeslaurrbasak: ah! thanks, I didn't know that page existed18:59
rbasakmdeslaur: is this because the "squid" transitional package has disappeared in -proposed?19:01
mdeslaurrbasak: that seems plausible, yes19:02
mdeslaurrbasak: are you adding it back?19:07
rbasakmdeslaur: I wasn't planning on touching it. I wonder if Debian have intentionally removed it, and if so then perhaps Debian needs to fix packages depending on it, too?19:07
mdeslaurrbasak: debian still has "squid" in the archive19:08
rbasakOh19:08
* rbasak looks19:09
rtginfinity, linux 3.11.0-2.5 is still lodged in proposed because of the eglibc autotest failure. Could you drop kick it into release ?19:10
infinityrtg: Yeah, will do.  I was trying to see if I could reproduce the eglibc failure first, which I seemingly can't.19:10
rtginfinity, make a really small disk ?19:11
xnoxmdeslaur: rbasak: they may have it, but is it build by the source package? Looking at debian/control of the package in sid, it no longer builds the squid binary package.19:12
infinityrtg: That's how to make the linux one fail.  The eglibc one seems weirder.19:12
xnoxit may still be in the debian archive, however. as in debian they postpone removing the package.19:12
infinityrtg: Anyhow, given a shove.19:13
rtginfinity, thanks19:13
mdeslaurxnox: nono, they have a squid _source_ package19:14
mdeslaurxnox: which build a squid binary package19:14
mdeslaurxnox: they have _both_ squid and squid319:14
rbasakLooks like we introduced a squid transitional package in Precise as an Ubuntu delta.19:14
rbasakAnd that we dropped this inadvertently in the last merge.19:15
xnoxmdeslaur: oh =(19:15
xnoxrbasak: i see.19:15
rbasak  * Dropped:19:15
rbasak    - debian/control: Dropped transitional packages from squid, no19:15
rbasak      longer required.19:15
rbasakMaybe more intentional than inadvertent!19:15
rbasakI'll file a bug.19:15
rbasakjamespage, yolanda: ^^19:15
rbasakI filed bug 121194219:22
ubot2`Launchpad bug 1211942 in squid3 (Ubuntu Saucy) "Dropped squid transitional package blocks -proposed migration" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/121194219:22
infinityrbasak: Was the transitional package introduced for lucid->precise?  If so, it's surely not needed anymore.19:29
infinityrbasak: And the right answer would be to make things stop depending on it.19:29
infinity(Not that keeping it would be wrong either)19:29
rbasakinfinity: Debian do seem to be keeping it.19:30
rbasakinfinity: it seems that we dropped it. But I suppose we could reintroduce it now that users have switched when they upgraded from lucid->precise? Is that what you're saying?19:31
rbasak(ie. reintroduce into universe)19:32
* adconrad wonders where his co-lo server has disappeared to for the last half hour.19:59
adconradrbasak: I wasn't suggesting we reintroduce squid2.  That would be confusing as heck if "apt-get install squid" got you an older version on saucy than it does on precise.20:00
adconradrbasak: Our two options, IMO, are to carry the transitional package (so, reintroduce that), or make everything that depends on "squid" depend on squid3 instead.20:00
rbasakadconrad: right20:00
adconradrbasak: Reinstroducing the transitional package seems the path of least resistance.20:01
rbasakAgreed. I'm just not sure what the logic was to drop the transitional package in the first place, which is why I filed the bug (as both yolanda and jamespage are EOD right now)20:01
adconradrbasak: The logic was likely "people have done the LTS->LTS upgrade, and now we expect them to install squid3 directly", as is the case with most transitional packages.20:02
adconradBut in the case where things still *depend* on the transitional package, dropping it is probably less sane.20:02
adconradrbasak: If I were you, I'd just upload to fix the bug, and not worry too much about the rationale.  :P20:02
jbichayou could just have squid3 Provides: squid now, right?20:04
adconradYou could do that instead, yes.20:04
rbasakAs long as dependent packages don't make their Depends: versioned in the future.20:04
=== adconrad is now known as infinity
cyphermox^ this replaces brcm-patchram-plus, which you should feel free to remove20:49
jamespagerbasak, that is whats commonly know as a mistake21:03
jamespagerbasak, lets get back in sync with Debian21:03
rbasakjamespage: by reintroducing squid 2?21:05
jamespagerbasak, oh - I see - Debian still has a squid source package21:06
jamespagerbasak, how odd21:06
rbasakRight21:06
jamespagerbasak, I'd re-introduce the squid binary package in squid321:07
rbasakSounds good21:07
jamespagerbasak, as we are skewed from Debian anyway21:07
jamespagerbasak, needs a merge as well21:07
jamespageah - I see why mdeslaur was asking now!21:15
=== infinity2 is now known as infinity

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!